Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication (11-158) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CASE NO.: — • DATE SUBMITTED: • 1 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION TIME: Home of TexdsAebAM University' STAFF: ZONING MAP T (REZONING) APPLICATION PLANNED DISTRICTS (Check one) © Planned Development District (PDD) ❑ Planned - Mixed Used Development (P -MUD) MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: © $1,165 Rezoning Application Fee. © Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided. ❑ Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the proposed request. One (1) copy of a fully dimensioned Rezoning Map on 24 "x36" paper showing: a. Land affected; b. Legal description of area of proposed change; c. Present zoning; d. Zoning classification of all abutting land; and e. All public and private rights -of -way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land. ❑ Written legal description of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is applicable). NIA platted ❑ A CAD (dxf /dwg) - model space State Plane NAD 83 or GIS (shp) digital file (e- mailed to P &DS_Digital _Submittal @cstx.gov). N/A platted © Fourteen (14) copies of the Concept Plan on 24 "x36" paper in accordance with Section 3.4.D of the UDO. © The attached Concept Plan checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not checked off. NOTE: If a petition for rezoning is denied by the City Council, another application for rezoning shall not be filed within a period of 180 days from the date of denial, except with permission of the Planning & Zoning Commission. ............................ Date of Optional Preapplication Conference August 17, 2011 NAME OF PROJECT Home2 Suites ADDRESS 300 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas 77802 LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision) Lots 2,3,4 of North Park Section 11 and Lot 2 of Lodgeco Subdivision GENERAL LOCATION OF PROPERTY IF NOT PLATTED: TOTAL ACREAGE 1.97 10/10 Page 1 of 7 APPLICANT /PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project): Name Steve Duncan (Engineer) E -mail sduncan @jonescarter.com Street Address 1716 Briarcrest Drive, Suite 160 City Bryan State Texas Zip Code 77802 Phone Number 979- 731 -8000 Fax Number 979- 846 -2893 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name Suraj and Anita Demla E -mail surajdemla @gmail.com Street Address 3525 Sandy Trail Lane ademla @gmail.com City Plano State Texas Zip Code 75023 Phone Number Fax Number OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.): Name Anil Ram, ADR Designs (Architect) E -mail adrdesigns @sbcglobal.net Street Address 1001 Austrian Road City Grand Prairie State Texas Zip Code 77505 Phone Number (972) 642 -0873 Fax Number This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated 12/1993 and recorded in Volume 1996 , P age 331 of the Brazos County Official Records. Existing Zoning C -1 and R -4 Proposed Zoning PDD Present Use of Property Vacant and 4 -plex Proposed Use of Property Hotel Proposed Use(s) of Property for PDD, if applicable: Hotel P -MUD uses are prescribed in Section 6.2.C. Use Table of the Unified Development Ordinance. If P -MUD: Approximate percentage of residential land uses: Approximate percentage of non - residential land uses: REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. List the changed or changing conditions in the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary. The zoning change is required to redevelop the property and construct a hotel. The three small lots are zoned R -4 which does not allow a hotel use. 10/10 Page 2 of 7 2, Indicate whether or not this zone change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. If it is not, explain why the Plan is incorrect. Yes. The Comprehensive Plan is designated as Urban and Re- development and we are doing Re- development. 3, How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood? This zoning change and proposed uses will be in conformity with the current zoning and uses of the adjacent properties. The adjacent properties are zoned C -1 with hotel and restaurant uses. 4. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested. The majority of the property is zoned C -1 which allows the hotel use. The smaller tracts are being consolidated with this redevelopment to make it compatible with the surrounding properties. 5. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district. Currently the property is split between C -1 (70 %) and R -4 (30 %). A hotel use is not permitted in R -4 and the facility could not be constructed on only the C -1 portion, therefore it is being consolidated and re- developed. 6. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district. The property could be marketed with the current zoning districts, however obviously not successfully as the vacant portion has been such for many years. The proposed consolidation allows for a substantial improvement to the area. 7. List any other reasons to support this zone change. The proposed re- zoning will allow a visually and economically viable addition to the area that has been un- developed and /or un- maintained for many years. 10/10 Page 3 of 7 8. State the purpose and intent of the proposed development. A multi -story hotel. CONCEPT PLAN SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. What is the range of future building heights? 4 to 6 stories. 2. Provide a general statement regarding the proposed drainage. The facility drains into the Burton Creek watershed and is in an area that required detention. The proposed post - development drainage will be evaluated and detained as required. 3. List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought. See attached. 4. If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and /or innovative design concepts to justify the request. See attached. 10/10 Page 4 of 7 5. Explain how the concept plan proposal will constitute and environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding area. This project will provide a viable, long term solution to the current conditions that fits in well with the surrounding developments. 6. Explain how the proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. It is a re- development project which meets the Comprehensive Plan requirements. 7, Explain how the concept plan proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not adversely affect adjacent development. Existing adjacent properties are fully developed in compliance with C -1 zoning with hotel and restaurant uses. The subject property development will be an asset to the adjacent properties. 8. State how dwelling units shall have access to a public street if they do not front on a public street. N/A g, State how the development has provided adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to: parks, schools, and other public facilities. Public improvement involve public water and sewer facilities connections as well as the improvement of Meadowland Street as a Public Way. 1 0/10 Page5of7 10. Explain how the concept plan proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The concept plan poses no threat to public health, safety, or welfare and is compatible with surrounding properties. 11, Explain how the concept plan proposal will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian circulation in the vicinity, including traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use and other uses reasonable anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses in the area. The concept plan is compatible with surrounding properties and provides safe automobile circulation. Please note that a "complete site plan" must be submitted to Planning & Development Services for a formal review after the "concept plan" has been approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit - except for single - family development, The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf. ra �C -? �' 1 ° / >y Signature and title Date 10/10 Page 6 of 7 Concept Plan Supporting Information Item 3 — List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought Item 4 — If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and/or innovative design concepts to justify the request Page I of I No. Item 3 — Variations 1. Remove Off -Street Parking Requirements associated with the meeting room facility (currently 1/200 SF meeting room). (UDO Section 7.2.I,Table: Minimum Off -Street Parking Requirements) 2. Setbacks — Remove requirement of the ten - foot (10') setback (UDO Section 7.9.B.6.a) were off-street parking is installed adjacent to the right-of-way. An eight -foot (8') setback would remain adjacent to the Texas Ave frontage and a six-foot (6') setback (UDO Section 7.2.C.7) would remain effective adjacent to the Meadowland ROW. 3. Remove 10' sidewalk requirement along facades facing the public ROW (UDO Section 7.9.E.4.d). Relocate tree wells to along the Meadowland public way. (UDO Section 7.9.E.3.b) Remove double island requirement adjacent to the public ROW on Meadowland. (UDO Section 7.2.C.7) 6. Allow a driveway that meets TxDOT requirements and incorporating access easements to the adjacent properties. (UDO Section 7.3.C.3.f & g) Item 4 — Justifications The meeting room at the hotel is designed for use of the hotel guests. The Home2 Suites hotel is an extended stay hotel designed to give the traveler a little more space than a typical hotel. Insignificant use of the meeting room from non - hotel guests will occur mostly during non -peak parking hours. The proposed meeting space is less than 600sf. The proposed hotel is a vertical urban redevelopment project and allowing the reduced setback enables more off-street parking within complex geometry of the site. This is similar to the six-foot (6') setback allowed in the Northgate Design District which is a primarily urban setting as well. The proposed hotel has a narrow fagade facing the right-of-ways as well as the hotel site plan includes pedestrian pathways within the site connecting the hotel to the surrounding different use properties. Relocating the tree wells along Meadowland creates a similar urban/vertical landscape effect to the Northgate Design District. The tree wells will be similarly located in the sidewalk adjacent to the curb. The proposed hotel does not have the Northgate street perspective, but does have similar vertical and urban feel. The existing streetscape requirements and screening requirements along Meadowland, will salve as sufficient landscaping to meet the needs of an urban development. The development does not meet the driveway spacing as listed in the UDO, but TxDOT has not noted objections. Furthermore, the concrete utility poles located on Texas Avenue frontage restrict the driveway location. ((,;�5 iv jJc_,-r Concept Plan Supporting Information Item 3 — List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought Item 4 — If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and/or innovative design concepts to justify the request Page 1 of 1 No. Item 3 — Variations Item 4 — Justifications 1. Change the parking requirements from I per DU plus 1/200 sf meeting room to I per 2 DU. (7.2.I) 2. Remove all buffer zone requirements (7.6) 3. Remove all additional standards for buildings 50,000 sf or greater (7.9.E) 4. Along the Meadowland Public Way, allow the 5' sidewalk to be adjacent to the back of curb vs 3' separation. (11.2) This re -development project cannot meet the parking requirements due to geometry of the site. The buffer zone distance, fencing, etc. to the adjacent 4-plex (R-4) would remove the community benefit of the existing shared access and parking arrangement. This building is currently planned at under 60,000 sf and the re -development would be significantly hindered with the additional 10' sidewalks, tree wells, etc. This will allow more room for streetscaping and other landscaping between the sidewalk and parking lot. S:10-JOBIC0120 ADR Designs, LLCIC0120-001 HOnie2 SaileslAPPROPALSICIITWI--PDD Rezon6PDD App variances.dac